Resistance

GERMAR RUDOLF, RESISTANCE IS OBLIGATORYdemanded violation of law by suppressing evidence, which he is aboutto perpetrate, is covered from higher up. Or in another case a differentjudge clearly states on the phone to a defense lawyer that instructionsexist from higher up not to admit evidence about the Holocaust underany circumstances.And if a mishap happens after all, as was the case in this Court in1994 when the judges Orlet, Müller, and Folkerts sentenced a historicaldissident only to a prison term on probation with the justification that hewas, after all, a decent chap, had only good intentions, and did not reallyharbor illegal opinions, then this will be corrected upon pressurefrom higher up by giving the respective judges the choice to either retireearly or face prosecution themselves, which proves that the so-calledindependence of the judges in Germany has turned into a farce.Since that event at the latest it is clear that historical dissidents areconsidered guilty right from the start not only regarding the objectiveside of the offense (i.e., the crime itself) due to the “self-evidence” ofthe Holocaust – without having any means to defend themselves againstit – but that also the subjective side of the offense (i.e., the offender) hasto be predetermined: We revisionists have to be considered as criminalswho cannot be reintegrated and to whom neither legitimate motives norgood character features or other mitigating circumstances must be conceded.Hence we are both objectively as well as subjectively sentencedbefore the trial has even begun.The next interesting passage of the unnamed author is:“The reader has seen throughout this book that from the very beginning[…] there have been no politicals in our courts. [… They]were merely common criminals.” (3/506)Each government claims about itself officially that there are no politicalprisoners in their country. Even the former communist East Germanyalways claimed this about itself. It is self-evident that one must notask the government of a country in order to find out whether politicalprisoners exist there. This is a trivial fact.And yet in German courts of law, behind closed doors, one readilyadmits that there are political trials indeed. In this context I may againremind you at my experiences in Bielefeld in 1992: In that year, duringthe trial against Udo Walendy in front of the District Court Bielefeld, towhich I had been summoned as an expert witness but as usual rejecteddue to “self-evidence,” I listened by chance as the prosecutor lauded thedefense lawyer Hajo Herrmann for his competence, yet defended his107